Support NeoGAF

[Rafa=FedKilla]

I love how the media has completely abandoned the narrative after NH that you can't win the nomination without winning either Iowa or NH.

 

[Veritigo_X]

Yes, you're right that I'm doing that to Clinton. Clinton has already done that to herself by choosing Kissinger as a key confidant.

Yes, you are doing that. And now you're overstating their relationship. You're acting like he was sitting at her side the entire time she was Secretary of State.

 

[Retromelon]

Think dan b's ps3's thermal paste finally dried up and thats why he doesnt post anymore?

 

[ivysaur12]

To only vehemently disagree with a mass murderer but still seek counsel from them seems like some kind of bizarre doublethink. It seems as if we have only lowered our standards for discourse.

There are people whom you vehemently disagree with who can provide insight. In fact, they may be able to provide necessary insight, even if they are evil people. This is the crux of our disagreement.

 

[Cerium]

They think Cruz and the Republicans wouldn't want to do it and it would make them look bad.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1184690

Cruz would be an idiot not to accept, and Obama would be an idiot to offer.

 

[Dixon's Jet]

Yes, you are doing that. And now you're overstating their relationship. You're acting like he was sitting at her side the entire time she was Secretary of State.

I don't think that I am overstating their relationship. It is remarkable for anyone to get up in front of millions of Americans and defend the virtue of a war criminal. That's what Hillary Clinton did.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

floridians, don't forget to register

I did

+1 clinton

 

[NeoXChaos]

I did

+1 clinton

u still registered in FL?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Yup, politics creates unusual friendships all the time. Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch, Paul Wellstone and Jesse Helms, Al Franken and Rand Paul to name a few.

In my personal life I tend to get a long personally with many republicans than democrats. I guess partly its there's a lack of feeling like you have to jocky among fellow partisans. There's a formal understanding that you hold different views so those don't tend to reflect on the person.

IIRC I think I was reading somewhere Greenwald (who seems like a dick from his media persona) is super nice and friendly with some people who are the totally opposite as him

 

[Dixon's Jet]

There are people whom you vehemently disagree with who can provide insight. In fact, they may be able to provide necessary insight, even if they are evil people. This is the crux of our disagreement.

What kind of insight could someone like Kissinger possibly provide? Was Hillary Clinton ordering a hit on someone? Don't confuse me with somebody on the right who would say a thing like that but I'm only half joking because Kissinger's legacy really is that bad. You have to wonder what the hell he says to Clinton during their private conversations.

 

[ivysaur12]

What kind of insight could someone like Kissinger possibly provide? Was Hillary Clinton ordering a hit on someone? Don't confuse with somebody on the right who would say a thing like that but I'm only half joking because Kissinger's legacy really is that bad. You have to wonder what the hell he says to Clinton during their private conversations.

Probably about Benghazi now that you mention it.

This is veering into conspiracy level.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

u still registered in FL?

Yeah. My mail still goes there and I've jumped around a bit in NY so I figured its still my permanent residence. If someone needed to mail me something life or death important I'd tell them to send it there

I'll likely chance it when I get an apartment of my own next year

Think dan b's ps3's thermal paste finally dried up and thats why he doesnt post anymore?

btw I upgraded my ps3s hdd last night. I'm not really sure why as I mostly game on xboxone now.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Yeah. My mail still goes there and I've jumped around a bit in NY so I figured its still my permanent residence.

I'll likely chance it when I get an apartment of my own next year

you are going to absentee for March 15th and November?

 

[Spoiled Milk]

What kind of insight could someone like Kissinger possibly provide? Was Hillary Clinton ordering a hit on someone? Don't confuse me with somebody on the right who would say a thing like that but I'm only half joking because Kissinger's legacy really is that bad. You have to wonder what the hell he says to Clinton during their private conversations.

Historical insight. Diplomatic advice. Harsh pragmatism.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Just watch the Trial of Henry Kissinger guys.

Each post moves "Kissinger" closer to "murdering Jews." Next post is gonna have Kissinger gassing them himself.

Especially since he was born in Germany and came to the US to flee the Nazis

 

[Dixon's Jet]

Probably about Benghazi now that you mention it.

This is veering into conspiracy level.

Again, don't confuse me with somebody on the right please. Kissinger's record speaks for itself here, I'm not wearing a tin foil hat. I think I deserve better than this response.

Kissinger has a lot of blood on his hands, that seems to have been his thing, what kind of advice could he possibly offer Hillary Clinton? Why should he have a voice in politics? I'm not saying Hillary Clinton uses him as a proxy for murder. The point was that such a wild claim seems strangely less hyperbolic given Hillary Clinton's staunch defense of Kissinger, or I suppose you could call it her support of Kissinger's revisionist treatment in her review.

It's baffling shit and Clinton should have disowned him by now.

 

[danm999]

Clinton vehemently disagreed with Kissinger's policies in Indo-China so who gives a shit.

Sanders has worked with McCain who similarly supported what occurred in Vietnam and Cambodia are we supposed to not listen to him as well.

I swear the left is becoming as batso as the right with ideological purity.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

you are going to absentee for March 15th and November?

Yeah. My ballot is in the mail now. (There's also a local election I care a lot about since its pretty much the good old boys of a southern town trying to change the towns charter because they lost the mayorship a last time and hate new people coming in)

 

[Makai]

Historical insight. Diplomatic advice. Harsh pragmatism.

Pragmatic doesn't mean much of anything. You can use it to justify just about any unpopular opinion. "Torture is horrible, but we have to be practical."

 

[B-Dubs]

Probably about Benghazi now that you mention it.

This is veering into conspiracy level.

The administration was probably planning Cuba while she was still there. Seems like he'd have some insight there.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Pragmatic doesn't mean much of anything. You can use it to justify just about any unpopular opinion. "Torture is horrible, but we have to be practical."

I don't think many people would/should object to torture in extreme circumstances if it worked. The issue is it doesn't so besides denying its use in less extreme circumstances it is banned in the most extreme.

(prempting any complaints about that being wrong, it seems very flimsy to say torture shouldn't be allowed if it worked in extreme circumstance but not to be a complete pacifist and decry every and all wars or killings based on human rights)

 

[BoboBrazil]

Why did MSNBC and CNN schedule town halls for the same time on Thursday?

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Pragmatic doesn't mean much of anything. You can use it to justify just about any unpopular opinion. "Torture is horrible, but we have to be practical."

No, what I'm referring to is the reality that some policies might seem reasonable or preferable because of idealistic or moral considerations, but when viewed in the context of other political realities, are undesirable or downright harmful. That's the pragmatism I'm talking about.

Don't confuse me with somebody on the right who would say a thing like that

You don't have to be on the right. My father's a socialist who believes Vince Foster was killed by Hillary Clinton. The right-wing smear campaign had lasting damage.

 

[Makai]

I don't think many people object to torture in extreme circumstances if it worked. The issue is it doesn't so besides denying its use in less extreme circumstances it is banned in the most extreme.

That's my point. I've heard "pragmatic" and "practical" come up too often throughout my life. It's gotta be one of the least convincing catch-all arguments ever. "That may be great in theory, but we have to be practical."

 

[dabig2]

Kissinger makes Dick Cheney look like a sensible dove. Kissinger is not a guy you proudly proclaim as having received advice from or corresponding with as some sort of foreign policy credit. It doesn't make you look big and strong and sensible, it makes you look like the person who just went to one of the worst war criminal assholes of the post-WW2 era for advice. This isn't McCain or Scalia or even the aforementioned fellow war criminal Dick Cheney. For someone already struggling with her hawkish record, name-dropping Kissinger is a seriously dumb move by Hillary and I'd be surprised to see her mention the man again. It only opens her up for more attack so obviously not the "pragmatic" thing for her to do.

 

[shinra-bansho]

If anyone's deriding the idea of a revolution, it's because it's an improbable fantasy-land wish that will never happen. It's basically something that [upper middle-class, well-educated] left-leaning people in every country secretly hope, but should know will never happen. The people will "become educated like me and stop voting against their interests" or start voting at all.

 

[besada]

For someone already struggling with her hawkish record, name-dropping Kissinger is a seriously dumb move by Hillary and I'd be surprised to see her mention the man again. It only opens her up for more attack so obviously not the "pragmatic" thing for her to do.

Hillary can't run away from Kissinger, though. He isn't just an advisor, but a close, personal friend. Regardless of her feelings about Vietnam, she clearly got over his role there, as their relationship is considerably more friendly than just respect for a talented Secretary of State.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

If anyone's deriding the idea of a revolution, it's because it's an improbable fantasy-land wish that will never happen.

Eh. I don't necessarly hold this view. Revolutions are actually relatively common and I think if we redefined it to include other radical changes even more.

I just think "revolution" tends to never be stable, be quickly reversed by revanchist forces, violent, disenfranchising of opponents, always requires the compromising of ideals (usually around liberalism and pluralism), etc.

It's just always messy and never usually sticks.

 

[pigeon]

I repeat: When Clinton thinks of that old war criminal who didn't mind if the Soviets gassed Jews, a man who felt the President should be able to assassinate anybody, a man who supports undermining foreign democracies, a man who cannot travel to many countries because he'll be arrested and face a trial in the Hague, she thinks of a warm friend and a great mentor.

Either say something substantive or stop repeating the same bad line over and over again. The only thing you have shown is that you don't know who Kissinger is, and you don't understand just how close Kissinger and Clinton are.

Kissinger is one of the authors, if not the author, of the realpolitik world we now inhabit.

That doesn't make him a good person -- I think you can probably reasonably argue he's a terrible person.

But we do live in his world. Learning from him is probably a good idea even if you don't agree with him -- even if you view yourself as his fundamental antithesis -- because most of the foreign policy problems you will be solving are going to involve tactics he developed, on one side or the other.

Keep in mind that the same people criticizing Kissinger for sanctioning genocide in South America or the USSR are criticizing Clinton for refusing to sanction genocide in Libya or Syria. There aren't any good answers when it comes to foreign policy. Every choice is terrible.

I think this goes back to shinra's post a little bit ago about what role we actually view America playing in the global political setting, which I will go back and respond to a little later even though it's like three pages back. I thought it was a thought-provoking post even though nobody responded to it. Possibly because foreign policy is hard!

 

[shinra-bansho]

Eh. I don't necessarly hold this view. Revolutions are actually relatively common and I think if we redefined it to include other radical changes even more.

I just think "revolution" tends to never be stable, be quickly reversed by revanchist forces, violent, disenfranchising of opponents, always requires the compromising of ideals (usually around liberalism and pluralism), etc.

It's just always messy and never usually sticks.

That sounds like ordinary politics.

I think this goes back to shinra's post a little bit ago about what role we actually view America playing in the global political setting, which I will go back and respond to a little later even though it's like three pages back. I thought it was a thought-provoking post even though nobody responded to it. Possibly because foreign policy is hard!

A few people responded, but for the most part I think people avoid it. Because it either requires a realpolitik view that will probably leave one perceived as a hawk, something that no one wants, or answers that aren't grounded in reality, which would presumably also provoke some sort of cognitive dissonance. Also, FP is hard.

The real world is hard.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Kissinger is one of the authors, if not the author, of the realpolitik world we now inhabit.

That doesn't make him a good person -- I think you can probably reasonably argue he's a terrible person.

But we do live in his world. Learning from him is probably a good idea even if you don't agree with him -- even if you view yourself as his fundamental antithesis -- because most of the foreign policy problems you will be solving are going to involve tactics he developed, on one side or the other.

Keep in mind that the same people criticizing Kissinger for sanctioning genocide in South America or the USSR are criticizing Clinton for refusing to sanction genocide in Libya or Syria. There aren't any good answers when it comes to foreign policy. Every choice is terrible.

I think this goes back to shinra's post a little bit ago about what role we actually view America playing in the global political setting, which I will go back and respond to a little later even though it's like three pages back. I thought it was a thought-provoking post even though nobody responded to it. Possibly because foreign policy is hard!

You're giving me flash backs to my 600 level American Foreign Policy class. Everything is fucked up, theories always are wrong, nobody knows what they're doing.

Half the time it seems foreign policy is more like Freudian psychoanalysis than experts applying their expertise

That sounds like ordinary politics.

the US has been relatively free from revolutions and instead been a pretty constantly evolutionary country. Go look at Europe

 

[Dixon's Jet]

Kissinger is one of the authors, if not the author, of the realpolitik world we now inhabit.

That doesn't make him a good person -- I think you can probably reasonably argue he's a terrible person.

But we do live in his world. Learning from him is probably a good idea even if you don't agree with him -- even if you view yourself as his fundamental antithesis -- because most of the foreign policy problems you will be solving are going to involve tactics he developed, on one side or the other.

Keep in mind that the same people criticizing Kissinger for sanctioning genocide in South America or the USSR are criticizing Clinton for refusing to sanction genocide in Libya or Syria. There aren't any good answers when it comes to foreign policy. Every choice is terrible.

I think this goes back to shinra's post a little bit ago about what role we actually view America playing in the global political setting, which I will go back and respond to a little later even though it's like three pages back. I thought it was a thought-provoking post even though nobody responded to it. Possibly because foreign policy is hard!

It is not all realpolitik with Kissinger. Much is also just straight up conspiracy to commit murder, like sabotaging the Paris peace talks. How does one justify that? http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons-vietnam-treason

 

[Rafa=FedKilla]

HES HHHHHHEEEEEEEERRREEEEEEEE

 

[dabig2]

Hillary can't run away from Kissinger, though. He isn't just an advisor, but a close, personal friend. Regardless of her feelings about Vietnam, she clearly got over his role there, as their relationship is considerably more friendly than just respect for a talented Secretary of State.

Still though, a lot of people don't know about her personal relationship with the man. She can help keep it that way by never mentioning him again in any sort of context till after the general. The media will then mostly drop it and I doubt Bernie will go after her through Kissinger if she doesn't bring it up again.

 

[Chichikov]

If anyone's deriding the idea of a revolution, it's because it's an improbable fantasy-land wish that will never happen. It's basically something that [upper middle-class, well-educated] left-leaning people in every country secretly hope, but should know will never happen. The people will "become educated like me and stop voting against their interests" or start voting at all.

The US have seen much more dramatic changes than what Sanders is proposing, even if 100% of what he wants get passed.
The greatest trick conservatives ever pulled is to persuade liberals than big changes are impossible.

p.s.
I said it before and I will say it again - liberals should have another push to get the Equal Rights Amendments through.
I think it's the right thing to do (and about fucking time) smart politically and it will remind people that you can actually achieve such things.

 

[besada]

Still though, a lot of people don't know about her personal relationship with the man. She can help keep it that way by never mentioning him again in any sort of context till after the general. The media will then mostly drop it and I doubt Bernie will go after her through Kissinger if she doesn't bring it up again.

The media's going to have a nice time with it, though. The Mother Jones story covering her trips to Punta Cana with Kissinger, and the Clintons wintering with him, is going to expand, and Bernistas are going to go hogwild for it. Hillary Clinton, wintering in the Dominican Republic with America's best known war criminal, living a lavish lifestyle, while being served by poor black Domincans sort of thing.

The US have seen much more dramatic changes than what Sanders is proposing, even if 100% of what he wants get passed.
The greatest trick conservatives ever pulled is to persuade liberals than big changes are impossible.

Some of us lived through the Reagan revolution

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

Seeing Dubya on CNN giving a speech again is absolutely surreal.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Still though, a lot of people don't know about her personal relationship with the man. She can help keep it that way by never mentioning him again in any sort of context till after the general. The media will then mostly drop it and I doubt Bernie will go after her through Kissinger if she doesn't bring it up again.

I think it most assuredly will come up again in the FP section of debates. I think the new approach is to essentially cite historical incidents, in addition to the Iraq War vote.

Clinton tends to just say a bunch of "stuff" which for the most part people don't understand and that usually doesn't actually answer the question posed in any specific way. But it sounds relatively impressive.

 

[Rafa=FedKilla]

I love Dubya faux southern charm. I also miss Laura Bush's expression where she looks like she just got transported to another universe.

 

[dramatis]

Hillary can't run away from Kissinger, though. He isn't just an advisor, but a close, personal friend. Regardless of her feelings about Vietnam, she clearly got over his role there, as their relationship is considerably more friendly than just respect for a talented Secretary of State.

She can't? Rather, don't you think these kinds of statements remind you of something that happened in 2008?

Yes, you're right that I'm doing that to Clinton. Clinton has already done that to herself by choosing Kissinger as a key confidant.

It's baffling shit and Clinton should have disowned him by now.

I faintly recall this "guilt by association" between Obama and...who was it? Google says it's Reverend Jeremiah Wright. One could argue a pastor can be even closer than a confidant about foreign policy.

But what did Wright have to do with Obama the person, really? In the end, what does Kissinger have to do with Hillary the person?

The problem with "guilt by association" is that it is a blatant attempt at taking the crimes of one person to smear another person because they have any sort of relationship. Perhaps if Kissinger were a part of the Hillary campaign, there might be an argument to be made. But he isn't. Maybe if there were a lot of email exchanges with Kissinger to indicate this so-called 'key confidant' relationship. But I'm pretty sure we would have known about them by now, if there were ever such emails; after all, Blumenthal got dragged through the mud.

So what does that leave? Instances in which Hillary said Kissinger was a close confidant? Why selectively believe her when she says that, and then claim she lies when she vows to pursue something good? Why pick and choose always in favor of the worst? Is this not a magnificent hypocrisy?

 

[QuiteWhittle]

New post-debate SC poll, commissioned by the SC state House GOP caucus:

https://twitter.com/SCHouseGOP/status/699368384350306304

Trump 33
Rubio 14
Cruz 14
Bush 13
Kasich 10
Carson 6

 

[Dixon's Jet]

She can't? Rather, don't you think these kinds of statements remind you of something that happened in 2008?


I faintly recall this "guilt by association" between Obama and...who was it? Google says it's Reverend Jeremiah Wright. One could argue a pastor can be even closer than a confidant about foreign policy.

But what did Wright have to do with Obama the person, really? In the end, what does Kissinger have to do with Hillary the person?

The problem with "guilt by association" is that it is a blatant attempt at taking the crimes of one person to smear another person because they have any sort of relationship. Perhaps if Kissinger were a part of the Hillary campaign, there might be an argument to be made. But he isn't. Maybe if there were a lot of email exchanges with Kissinger to indicate this so-called 'key confidant' relationship. But I'm pretty sure we would have known about them by now, if there were ever such emails; after all, Blumenthal got dragged through the mud.

So what does that leave? Instances in which Hillary said Kissinger was a close confidant? Why selectively believe her when she says that, and then claim she lies when she vows to pursue something good? Why pick and choose always in favor of the worst? Is this not a magnificent hypocrisy?

The link between Clinton and Kissinger has already been proven. No, this is not like what was done to Obama and Wright. When did reverend Wright betray the President of the United States efforts to negotiate a country from war into peace? Kissinger has a lot of blood on his hands, it's not the same thing.

Kissinger supports genocide. Kissinger made the world notably worse through his efforts.

 

[kirblar]

The Kissinger stuff doesn't come up in the General, because it's not an attack that works coming from the Right.

 

[Y2Kev]

New post-debate SC poll, commissioned by the SC state House GOP caucus:

https://twitter.com/SCHouseGOP/status/699368384350306304

Trump 33
Rubio 14
Cruz 14
Bush 13
Kasich 10
Carson 6

Kasich is a bit fucked. Trump has to hang on five more days and this is ovah.

 

[danm999]

The link between Clinton and Kissinger has already been proven.

You're still not making the link between his policies in Indo-China and Clinton though.

 

[Plinko]

Cruz and that new attack about Trump wanting to pick his "Extreme pro-abortion" sister for the Supreme Court.

I mean, the guy gets called out for lying and then flatout lies again? I don't get it.

Also, Trump still with a near 20-point lead? "Guys, guys--Rubio is back!" Call me crazy, but I think Trump is going to draw a lot of Kasich's and Carson's voters when he drops out.

 

[HylianTom]

I wonder who drops after SC. Hoping that Jeb and Marco stay in until Florida.

The narrowing of the field seemed damn stealthy..

 

[Aaron Strife]

New post-debate SC poll, commissioned by the SC state House GOP caucus:

https://twitter.com/SCHouseGOP/status/699368384350306304

Trump 33
Rubio 14
Cruz 14
Bush 13
Kasich 10
Carson 6

Hopefully Rubio finishes in fourth.

Bush, Cruz, I believe in you.

 

[Dixon's Jet]

You're still not making the link between his policies in Indo-China and Clinton though.

He's Clinton's mentor.

 

[eBay Huckster]

He's "Clinton's mentor", which somehow renders meaningless anything on which they might disagree